Yeah, most states seem to think that only guns are "civilized" and that weapons like the nunchaku, which is more defensive and far less likely to result in accidental deaths, ought to be totally taboo. One Arizona court said that "arms" (as in "the right to bear") did not include nunchaku, which are the sort of weapons used by a "ruffian, brawler, or assassin." (Talk about having an image problem...)

I think what they meant was: Guns are highly complex devices which are expensive to manufacture, unlike sticks and knives, so the more expensive a weapon is, the more legitimate it's use, because the more money someone has, the more legitimate they are. Especially if the powers that be want guns themselves.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jamoni:I think what they meant was: Guns are highly complex devices which are expensive to manufacture, unlike sticks and knives, so the more expensive a weapon is, the more legitimate it's use, because the more money someone has, the more legitimate they are. Especially if the powers that be want guns themselves.[/QUOTE]Wow! Good post jamoni, Why did'nt I think of that. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/mad.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ender:If nunchuka are so bad, why the hell do soldiers use guns?

Think about it.

[/QUOTE]

I agree, I'd rather have a crazed nunchaku guy coming at me than a gun weilding criminal. However, if someone with nunchaku ever comes at me with a crazed glint in his eye, I'm gonna look for any sort of weapon i can improvise, no way I'm going to go toe to toe with person THAT insane.

Ender wrote:-----------------"If nunchuka are so bad, why the hell do soldiers use guns?Think about it.

Ironically, if the government is saying that nunchaku are more dangerous, wouldn't they want to arm they're soldiers with a more dangerous weapon?

Of course, logically, guns are far more destructive, but that isn't what the government is saying."------------------

I agree with the last part. Government policies relative to guns vis-a-vis nunchaku have nothing to do with logical analysis. In a modern democracy, they have a lot to do with interest groups, influence, MONEY (right, Jamoni) and the sorts of analyses that can be done in 20-second sound bite (pretty meager). By the early 1970s nunchaku had become associated in the popular (voting) mind with "bad" people: gang members, bikers, etc.--you know, the "undesirables." There was and remains no equivalent of the NRA to protect the rights of martial artists to train peacefully in their own homes with a pair of sticks that have a noble history of development as a weapon among the oppressed people of the Ryukyus in the 1600s. So today, four centuries after that oppression, New York and California are leading the states in ridding the nation of these nasty sticks recently associated with "bad people" by defining as a crime the mere possession of those sticks in their homes. In New York, a conviction means a year in prison.

"Think about it."

P.S. People DO carry 'em on the streets. I'm not challenging the laws relating to concealed carry in public. I'm challenging the idea that someone can be locked up for a year and branded a criminal for peaceful at-home training with a pair of nunchaku that never leaves the house.

How many people walk around with nunchaku? Well, it's kinda hard to tell, isn't it? Unlike the baseball bats you mention, the Okinawan sticks can be stashed in the waistband, etc., and carried concealed. I'd say there are plenty out there. One just doesn't see them all that often.

On 7/13 one participant in this thread (HKD...) mentioned having been confronted by a guy who pulled a pair of sticks on him a few weeks before that. Yeah, it happens. This is no academic discussion...

It used to be that some folks from Chinatown trained in sizable groups with the Kung Fu three-section-staff right in the public plaza in front of the federal courthouse in Manhattan. No one bothered them. I used to watch them and wonder how the federal marshals and local cops would have reacted had someone brought a pair of nunchaku and offered a similar peaceful demonstration with a similar weapon.

But that IS an academic discussion. Anyone seen by a law enforcement officer in New York with nunchaku will be promptly arrested. Yeah, even in their own home...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MrVigerous:Well you have two options really as i see it. One is get a weapon of your own to counter it. Two is take a hit somewhere that you dont mind a big bruise (hopefuly nothing worse) such as your arm and then shove the rice flails up the attackers' arse. To be honest most people wont use them that effectively, they will just swing with it in big old strokes.

I would agree with you on taking one hit , although I have been a master with the nunchukas for 10 years using them since age 14 I love the workout they provide! My only point is that if he looks like he does really know what he is doing you will definately take more than one before you recover.It's definately time to run unless you are fast enough to get the center of the stix, the string/chain (my preference is string , made from army boot laces).Be safe!